WATCH: NBC Legal Analyst Applauds Trump and Co-Defendants’ Attorneys’ Closing Arguments Against Fani Willis in Disqualification Hearing – “The State is Going to Have to Bring it on”

Nathan Wade sits in on closing arguments in the disqualification hearing against Fani Willis and her office

NBC legal analysts and reporters reacted to Trump and his co-defendants’ attorneys’ closing arguments in the hearing to disqualify Fani disqualify Soros-funded Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for having an improper relationship with her appointee as the special prosecutor in the Georgia RICO indictment and financially benefitting from said relationship.

NBC legal analyst and former Manhattan Assistant DA Catherine Christian told NBC’s Danny Cevallos, “The state is going to have to bring it on,” while noting the powerful argument of Jeff Clark’s attorney, Harry McDougald, “as he said the six ways that the DA is office and particularly DA Willis had conflicts of interest.”

Fani Willis also entered the courtroom alongside Nathan Wade, who had been in the courtroom since the hearing began.

CNN reports,

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has just arrived in the courtroom where her attorneys are defending her against an effort to disqualify her from the election subversion case she brought against Donald Trump and others.

The last time Willis was in the courtroom she delivered dramatic testimony in defense of a romantic relationship she had with Nathan Wade, the top prosecutor on the case, amid allegations from some defendants that the relationship was improper.

Willis is not expected to address the court on Friday as the judge hears closing arguments in the effort to remove her from the case.

“It’s driving me nuts that he’s sitting there,” Christian said of Nathan Wade. “He definitely should not be sitting at the table there right in the face of the judge and everyone else. I don’t know who made that decision. If he made it himself, someone above him should have overruled him. He should not be in that courtroom.”

The hearing ended at approximately 4:15 pm ET after the judge heard weak arguments from the District Attorney’s office. Judge McAffe says he expects to make a ruling “within the next two weeks.”

Watch a replay of the hearing here:

WATCH LIVE: Closing Arguments in Fani Willis Disqualification Hearing Today at 1 PM ET

NBC legal analyst Kristen Gibbons Feden, also a former prosecutor, added, “I can tell you from watching the hearings as well as hearing defensive arguments which I agree with both of you have been excellent thus far. I think they have an uphill battle.” She continued, ” I think it’s really going to be difficult for them to have to overcome.”

Watch below:

Christian: I just have to say, the state is going to have to bring it on because one after another; not every lawyer was, you know, on top of it. I thought Mr. McDougald’s ending was, in many ways, one of the best as he outlined, as he said the six ways that the DA is office and particularly DA Willis had conflicts of interest: financial, political ambition, concede and concealment, her church speech, her protective order that she’s submitted in her — that’s another thing, her boyfriend. How many times as Mr. Wade been referred to as the boyfriend as he’s sitting there, in the courtroom, and it’s driving me nuts that he’s sitting there.

Cevallos: Harry McDougal made an argument I hadn’t considered before, and it’s the idea that the DA’s office, by involving itself not only in Nathan Wade’s personal privilege assertions, his assertions of attorney-client privilege, but also Nathan Wade’s personal divorce action, may have also created a conflict. What did you make of that argument? Because it’s something I had not thought of before.

Christian: I thought it was great. Immediately, when he was saying we both looked at each other. That’s right. DA Willis files a protective order in her boyfriend, Mr. Wade’s, divorce case. They were asserting the attorney-client privilege on behalf of Mr. Wade. So, when the objections that were being made were not made by Mr. Wade’s personal attorney, they were made by her prosecutors, and I think that’s inappropriate. He had a personal attorney there in the courtroom, that attorney should have been making it. So it was a very thorough outlining of their position. Now, we haven’t heard from the prosecution, but they did, I thought a very thorough job, and they started off saying to the judge, we don’t need an actual conflict. We just need an appearance of a conflict, and they went through what their allegations of her violations of all the ethical rules. They named about six different rules of professional responsibility that they say DA Willis violated.

Cevallos: I wanted to ask you, Nathan Wade, he’s in the courtroom. What do you think of his presence during these closing arguments?

Christian: He should not be there. He should not be on the trial team. He definitely should not be sitting at the table there right in the face of the judge and everyone else. I don’t know who made that decision. If he made it himself, someone above him should have overruled him. He should not be in that courtroom.

source

Share :
comments

post a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *